对《企业职工伤亡事故调查分析规则》若干问题的建议

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.04.002

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2018, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (4): 7-12.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.04.002

对《企业职工伤亡事故调查分析规则》若干问题的建议

傅贵¹ 教授, 贾清淞¹, 许素睿² 副教授

1 中国矿业大学(北京)资源与安全工程学院,北京 100083
2 中国劳动关系学院安全工程系,北京 100048

收稿日期:2018-01-07 修回日期:2018-03-11 出版日期:2018-04-28 发布日期:2020-09-28
作者简介:傅贵(1961—),男,吉林九台人,博士,教授,博士生导师,主要从事安全管理、行为安全、安全文化及事故预防的研究。E-mail:fugui66@126.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助(51534008)。

Study on shortcomings in rules for investigation and analysis of casualty accidents of enterprise staff and workers and suggestions for classification of accident causes

FU Gui¹, JIA Qingsong¹, XU Surui²

1 School of Resources &Safety Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Beijing 100083, China
2 School of Safety Engineering, China Institute of Industrial Relations, Beijing 100048, China

Received:2018-01-07 Revised:2018-03-11 Online:2018-04-28 Published:2020-09-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为清楚地辨识事故原因,主要利用枚举分析法(MECE)中独立与穷尽的思想,检验《企业职工伤亡事故调查分析规则》(简称《规则》)对事故直接原因、间接原因定义与分类的科学性。从分类的独立穷尽、规则的适用范围、所应用的事故致因理论来源等多角度论述《规则》中事故原因分类的缺点;引入事故致因“2-4”模型(24Model),进一步讨论以岗位划分事故原因的弊端,并重新定义不安全动作与不安全物态;应用新的定义将《规则》中的直接原因、间接原因项重新分类。研究结果表明:新的定义与分类包含了《规则》中提到的所有原因,并能将其分散和定位到24Model中的各个层面或阶段。

关键词: 事故调查分析规则, 不安全动作, 不安全物态, 事故致因分类, 事故致因“2-4”模型(24Model)

Abstract: In order to clearly identify the causes of the accident, this article mainly uses the thoughts of independence and exhaustion in Mutually Exclusive Collectively Exhaustive (MECE) analysis to test the scientificalness of the classification of the direct and indirect causes of accident in GB6442-1986, and finally draws the shortcomings in the classification of accident causes in GB6442-1986 from three perspectives: independence and exhaustion, scope of application and origin of accident-causing theory. After that, this article introduces the 24Model which divides the causes of accident into organization and individual to redefine unsafe acts and unsafe conditions, uses the new definition and classification to reclassify the items of direct and indirect causes in GB6442-1986.The results show that the new definitions and classifications contain all the causes mentioned in GB6442-1986 and can disperse and locate them at various levels or stages in 24Model.

Key words: rules for accident investigation and analysis, unsafe act, unsafe condition, classification of accident caused, 24Model

中图分类号:

X921

傅贵, 贾清淞, 许素睿. 对《企业职工伤亡事故调查分析规则》若干问题的建议[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(4): 7-12.

FU Gui, JIA Qingsong, XU Surui. Study on shortcomings in rules for investigation and analysis of casualty accidents of enterprise staff and workers and suggestions for classification of accident causes[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(4): 7-12.

参考文献

[1] HEINRICH H W, PETERSON D, ROOS N. Industrial accident prevention[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1980: 22-31.
[2] REASON J. Human error[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990: 212-220.
[3] WIEGMANN D A, SHAPPELL S A. A human error approach to aviation accident analysis[M]. Aldershot:Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2003: 78-82.
[4] GB6442—1986,企业职工伤亡事故调查分析规则[S].
GB6442-1986,Rules for investigation and analysis of casualty accidents of enterprise staff and workers[S].
[5] BARBARA M. The minto pyramid principle[M]. London: Minto International, 1996: 82-88.
[6] GB6441—1986,企业职工伤亡事故分类标准[S].
GB6441-1986,Classification for casualty accidents of enterprise staff and workers[S].
[7] REASON J. Revisiting the Swiss cheese model of accident[M]. Brussels:Eurocontrol Experimental Centre, 2006: 17-18.
[8] 隋鹏程. 伤亡事故分析与预防原理[J]. 工业安全与环保, 1982(5): 1-8.
SUI Pengcheng. Accident analysis and prevention principle[J]. Industrial Safety and Environmental Protection, 1982(5): 1-8.
[9] MOTOHARU W. Safety assessment[J]. Journal of Advanced Science, 1993, 5(4): 1-4.
[10] 傅贵. 关于事故分类、事故原因的定义与分类[EB/OL]. [2017-05-30].http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=603730&do=blog&id=1052432.
[11] WHITTAKER R H. New concepts of kingdoms or organisms. evolutionary relations are better represented by new classifications than by the traditional two kingdoms[J]. Science, 1969, 163(3863): 150-160.
[12] 傅贵,樊运晓,佟瑞鹏, 等. 通用事故原因分析方法(第4版)[J]. 事故预防学报,2016, 1(2): 7-12.
FU Gui, FAN Yunxiao, TONG Ruipeng,et al. A universal method for the causation analysis of accidents(Version 4.0)[J].Journal of Accident Prevention, 2016, 1(2): 7-12.
[13] 傅贵. 不安全动作是谁发出的？[EB/OL]. [2013-03-20].http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=603730&do=blog&id=672320.

对《企业职工伤亡事故调查分析规则》若干问题的建议

Study on shortcomings in rules for investigation and analysis of casualty accidents of enterprise staff and workers and suggestions for classification of accident causes

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 4

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	孙世梅, 耿晓帅, 傅贵. 基于“2-4”模型的建筑电气火灾事故直接原因研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(4): 93-99.
[2]	许素睿. 基于蒙特卡罗法的煤矿工人不安全行为风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(4): 172-178.
[3]	孙世梅, 赵金坤, 傅贵. 基于“2-4”模型的高处坠落事故行为原因研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(8): 23-28.
[4]	傅贵, 薛宇敬阳, 佟瑞鹏, 栗继祖. HFACS与24Model不安全动作因素对应关系研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(1): 7-12.